Staged surgical treatment for temporomandibular joint ankylosis: intraoral distraction after temporalis muscle flap reconstruction.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Ankylosis↗
Biomedical subjects
Tae-Geon Kwon
Publications and source records attributed to Tae-Geon Kwon.
Runx2 regulates FGF2-induced Bmp2 expression during cranial bone development.
Calvarial bone is formed by the intramembranous bone-forming process, which involves many signaling molecules. The constitutive activation of the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling pathway accelerates osteoblast differentiation and results in premature cranial suture closure. Bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signaling pathways, which involve the downstream transcription factors Dlx5 and Msx2, are also involved in the bone-forming processes. However, the relationships between these two main signaling cascades are still unclear. We found that FGF2 treatment of developing bone fronts stimulated Bmp2 gene expression but that BMP2 treatment could not induce Fgf2 expression. Moreover, the disruption of the Runx2 gene completely eliminated the expression of Bmp2 and its downstream genes Dlx5 and Msx2 in the developing primordium of bone, while the expression of Fgf2 was maintained. In addition, cultured Runx2-/- cells expressed very low baseline levels of Bmp2 that were up-regulated by transfection with a Runx2-expressing plasmid. These levels in turn were markedly elevated by FGF2 treatment. FGF2 treatment also strongly enhanced the Bmp2 expression in MC3T3-E1 cells, whose endogenous Runx2 gene is intact and which express Bmp2 at low baseline levels as well. These results indicate that Runx2 is an important mediator of the expression of Bmp2 in response to FGF stimulation in cranial bone development.
Animals↗
Treatment of open bite with microscrew implant anchorage.
Open bite treatment with microscrew implant anchorage is discussed in relation to vertical control of the posterior dentoalvelar dimension. Maxillary microscrew implants provided anchorage for intruding the posterior teeth and retracting the anterior teeth; mandibular microscrew implants were used to apply intrusion force distal to the mandibular first molars to prevent mesial tipping of the posterior teeth during space closure. Closing the mandibular plane after intruding the maxillary posterior teeth and bodily mesial movement of the mandibular posterior teeth contributed to facial profile improvement. The efficacy and potency of microscrew implants in open bite treatment are discussed.
Adult↗
Nonextraction treatment with microscrew implants.
The maxillary and mandibular posterior teeth were retracted with microscrew implants (1.2 mm in diameter and six to 10 mm long) that were placed into the alveolar bone and used as anchorage. The retraction proceeded without adverse reciprocal effects on the reactive part of the conventional mechanics, such as premolar extrusion and flaring of the incisors. The anterior crowding was resolved without any deleterious effect on the facial profile. En masse movement of the posterior teeth and the whole dentition after anterior tooth alignment can reducethe treatment period and maximize the efficiency of the treatment. The microscrew implants were maintained firmly throughout the treatment and were able to provide an anchorage for retraction of whole dentitions. The efficacy and potency of the microscrew implants aid mechanics in the nonextraction treatment of both labial and lingual treatments.
Adolescent↗
Sliding mechanics with microscrew implant anchorage.
Three cases are illustrated. One was treated with maxillary microscrew implants, another with mandibular microscrew implants, and the third with both maxillary and mandibular microscrew implants. With the maxillary microscrew implants, the maxillary anterior teeth were retracted bodily with a slight intrusion and all the premolar extraction space was closed without loss of anchorage. Furthermore, the maxillary posterior teeth showed distal movement. The mandibular microscrew implants controlled the vertical position of the mandibular posterior teeth and played an important role in improving the facial profile. The efficacy of sliding mechanics with microscrew implant anchorage on the treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion is also discussed.
Adolescent↗
BMP-2-induced Osterix expression is mediated by Dlx5 but is independent of Runx2.
BMP-2 stimulates the expression of three osteogenic master transcription factors: Runx2, Dlx5, and Osterix (Osx). However, the hierarchical regulatory relationships among them are not yet clearly understood. Osx was commonly stimulated in osteogenic and non-osteogenic cells in response to BMP-signaling, as Dlx5 was in our previous report. A cycloheximide experiment indicated that Osx expression by BMP-2 requires new protein synthesis. Even if Osx has been suggested as a downstream target of Runx2, the results of this study indicated that Osx expression was still induced by BMP-2 treatment in Runx2 null cells, but not induced by Runx2 overexpression in myogenic C2C12 cells. Instead, Osx expression by BMP-2 was completely abrogated by the antisense blocking of Dlx5. Depending upon the coincident expression pattern of Osx and Dlx5, and the blocking of Osx expression by the antisense Dlx5, BMP-2-induced Osx expression is mainly mediated not by Runx2, but by Dlx5.
Animals↗
Reproducibility of maxillary positioning in Le Fort I osteotomy: a 3-dimensional evaluation.
PURPOSE: In the present study, we evaluated the difference between the model surgery movement and the actual surgical movement in the horizontal (X), vertical (Y), and transverse (Z) directions using the same reference coordinates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twelve patients (6 male and 6 female, mean age of 24.3 years) who underwent Le Fort I osteotomy and sagittal split ramus osteotomy were included in the study. The maxillary position was controlled by an intermediate splint and face-bow/bite-fork combination system. A coordinate transformation system with transition matrices was developed, which enabled objective comparison between the planned surgical change of the maxilla on the articulator and the actual surgical change assessed by the 3-dimensional cephalogram. RESULTS: The absolute mean difference was 2.2 mm. The difference between the model surgery and the surgical result ranged from -7.7 mm to 6.6 mm. The surgical result differed from the planned surgical movement by more than 2 mm in more than 45% of the measured coordinate values. CONCLUSION: Although all of the patients were satisfied with their postsurgical appearance and occlusion, the result shows that further development is required in the maxillary positioning system.
Adult↗